MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W64530348 · doi:10.1155/2000/503510

Revisiting ′Respiratory Function in Emphysema in Relation to Prognosis′

2000· article· en· W64530348 on OpenAlexaff
David V. Bates

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Respiratory Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDLCODiffusing capacityChronic bronchitisPulmonary function testingInternal medicinePulmonologyCardiologyLung functionLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The 1956 paper by DV Bates, JMS Knott and RV Christie, "Respiratory function in emphysema in relation to prognosis" Quart J Med 1956;97:137-157 is largely reprinted with a commentary by the first author, Dr David Bates. Although the pathology of emphysema was well recognized at the time, the clinical diagnosis and assessment of its severity were known to be imprecise; physiological measurements assessing and following the clinical course had not been established. The study aimed to follow systematically a group of patients, selected by clinical criteria using standardized clinical and physiological techniques, over four years and correlate physiological and clinical changes in relation to prognosis and eventually to postmortem findings. Fifty-nine patients were recruited to an emphysema clinic at St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, England. Inclusion criteria were dyspnea without other causes and no cor pulmonale present. Patients' symptoms were assessed by a standardized questionnaire, and measurements were taken of lung volumes, maximal ventilatory volume, carbon monoxide diffusing capacity at rest, exercise and oxygen saturation by oximetry. During the four years of the study, 17 patients died (actuarial expected - four) and 13 presented with signs of pulmonary heart failure. All postmortem examinations (n=9) showed advanced emphysema. A seasonal variation in dyspnea was established (the period included the infamous 1952 London smog). Four patients improved, and the remainder were unchanged or deteriorated. Close relationships were shown between dyspnea and function results, particularly for the diffusing capacity of lungs for carbon monoxide (DLCO). A comparison among a group of patients with chronic bronchitis without dyspnea showed that the DLCO discriminated between them. A loss of the normal increase in DLCO during exercise was shown in emphysema. IMPORTANCE: The study showed the value of standardized clinical and physiological techniques in following chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, and of separating the effects of airflow obstruction from impaired gas exchange function. Impaired gas exchange was shown to be important in influencing prognosis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Respiratory JournalSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207